Follow Barack Obama prior and during his tenure as the 44th President of the United States. Read about my personal observations along with every day facts as they happen. This blog will only submit factual information about the first black President, now in his 2nd term of office.


Send E-mail to the Editor at:

Search This Blog

Last Chance to Avoid the Fiscal Cliff

Tuesday, December 25, 2012

On December 27, the House and Senate members are expected to convene and continue talks over how to prevent automatic tax increases for everyone and also deep spending cuts that will be triggered in the new year without an agreement. It is now apparent that the Republican House, now in full disarray will not be able to come up with any progress without another plan from the Democratically led Senate. Still with their inability to come up with a solution on their own, the Republican led Congressional members did go home and enjoy their Christmas holiday, not taking into consideration how serious it was not getting the fiscal cliff issue resolved before Christmas. After all, if a deal is not met, the Congress won't be hurting, as those very rich Senators will not even think twice of allowing such a disaster from happening to the American people, because it just won't affect them. I am totally convinced now that the Congress just doesn't care. Every American will feel a paycheck decrease, take-home pay that will be cut automatically by 2% starting January 1, 2013, the effect of raised taxes. The U.S. Credit rating now stands a chance of being lowered again. The main dispute continues to be over taxes, specifically the demand by Obama and Democrats to extend most of the tax cuts passed under President George W. Bush while allowing higher rates of the 1990's to return on top income brackets.
Something that I don't believe has ever been seen before, the House Speaker John Boehner in an attempt to compromise with the Democrats, realized that he did not have the support from his own colleagues in the process, and suffered what is said to be political indignity. Many hard right wingers are now calling for Boehner's resignation, saying that he is too far to the left of where he needs to be for his own party. Still, he was overwhelmingly supported by his fellow Senators to continue in his present job as Speaker of the House. When Nancy Pelosi was the Speaker of the past Democratically controlled House, she always had her fellow Senators in check, and knew exactly how the vote would turn out, and would never even attempt to have a vote if she didn't know what the outcome would be with a great amount of certainty. But John Boehner does not have the backing now of his fellow Republican Senators, and he is not able to predict even what his own party will do in the House. The bill that he supported never made it to the Senate because he knew that he could not drum up enough support from his own House Republicans to pass the bill along to the Senate, even though he sincerely thought he would be able to provide a House supported bill to Congress for their vote.
Now instead of leading the way, the Republican Senators in the House will depend on the Democratically controlled Senate to come up with a bill that they can support. But there is a catch. The Democrats will not present such a bill unless the Republicans also support it this time around.  A cat and mouse game continues to play out in Congress.
The Republican party, especially the Senators in the House are sincerely not capable of creating laws on their own without causing grief to others. Why do the American people continue to support such people? It goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway, that time is running out for the dysfunctional Republicans, and they all chance the possibility in loosing their jobs in 2014 when they must run again to keep their jobs.


Late 2012 Tax Returns if no 'Fiscal Cliff' Resolution is made by Dec. 31

Thursday, December 20, 2012

How bad do you need your 2012 tax returns next year? Well, if you can't file them until late March 2013, then you stand a good chance that you will not get your return until late spring or summer. Is that crazy or what! The fact is that this is absolutely the case if a fiscal cliff deal does not take place by December 31, 2012. The IRS would be severely limited on their activities and the refund program will suffer in result of no tax decision by the end of the year. Also, income exemption levels under the "wealth tax" - as the AMT is known -- were never adjusted for inflation since it was enacted decades ago. So Congress has regularly passed an AMT "patch" to correct for that by raising the exemption levels.  The tax season begins in two weeks. Even though inflation has gone up in 2012, exemption levels will not rise if the fiscal cliff issue is not resolved within two weeks, which means guaranteed more taxes for everyone.
Enough is enough. Keep it up Congress, as you are doing a great job in failing the American people. If year end goes by without tax cuts put into play, then the next thing to look for is going from a 'AA+' rating to 'AA'. This would be catastrophic to everyone."If the negotiations on the fiscal cliff and raising the debt ceiling extend into 2013 and appear likely to be prolonged with adverse implications for the economy and financial stability, the U.S. sovereign rating could be subject to review, potentially leading to a negative rating action," Fitch ratings agency said in a bi-annual report. Standard & Poor's cut its U.S. rating to AA+ in 2011, citing political brinkmanship that was preventing agreement on raising the debt ceiling -- without which the government can't pay its bills -- and a longer term plan to reduce borrowing. It warned earlier this year that a further downgrade was possible in the absence of a debt deal.
Congress continues in its lack of creating bills that would benefit everyone, but this latest failure would mean a disastrous end to the 2012 year. As everyone knows, the good and bad have shown themselves. President Obama was re-elected as President, and a city in Connecticut known as Newtown is the latest victim of a gun-slinger that killed 20 children at an elementary school. It sure would be great if Congress would just get something done to avert the tax issues and the remnants of failing to get it done by years end. Unfortunately, we the American people seem to be at our lawmakers mercy.


Stories becoming 'Over-kill' about Newtown

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Opinion of the Editor 'James' Obama in the White House Blog

Enough is enough! I've read so many stories now about the killings in Newtown, that I'm just about sick of hearing the same story over and over again, each time getting a little more information and details that continuously surface about the killer and about the school tragedy. How long must the TV stations keep broadcasting about the violence that strangled Newtown, Connecticut?  Yes, the story is very important, and continuously repeats the call for more gun control, and the debates regarding this subject are already stirring and have been revisited time and time again, without anything of any substance getting done. But what are the effects of such a story amongst the people who watch them? For me, and for most people across the country, it is nothing short of a devastating story, one that shakes your bones, knowing that 20 children perished in the shooting, ages 6 and 7, all merely first graders in a school that may never open again. All of the children will be attending other schools for an undetermined amount of time.
That's not the issue here. What is my issue with the stories are what effect does continuing to hear such a story have on the crazy people who perpetrate the crimes using gun violence? It makes them feel more powerful and more important in their own sick mind.  Just glancing over the national news will give you the answer. A man in the state of Indiana was arrested after trying to repeat the tragedy that occurred Friday in Newtown, Connecticut.  As the crazy man said, "kill as many people as he could at an elementary school." Upon searching his home, the police found 47 guns and ammunition throughout his residence. The value of his gun collection is well over $100,000. A man in his 60's, he was arrested with tons of charges and the man seems to be totally insane. He's all over the national news, and probably loving every minute of it. People now know his name, which I will not mention here.
In another instance, a man threatened to set his wife on fire after she fell asleep, then he also threatens to go to a nearby elementary school named 'Jane Ball Elementary' and open fire. The school is only 1000 feet from his home. He wasn't arrested until last Friday? why? Because they needed a warrant.  As a member of the 'Invaders Motor Cycle Gang', he resisted arrest even though a swat team came to his home, obviously another crazy man.
So truly copy-cat terminology and over-saturation of stories such as these are doing more harm than good. How many times throughout your day do you have to be reminded about the shootings of 6 and 7 year old children? Yes, stories like these spark your interest, but parents with children only have to be reminded only once that a situation of a shooting like the one in Newtown occurred  and they will take measures that they deem necessary to protect their own children. You don't need much news coverage for parents to find out that something such as this happened in the country. If you don't want to propagate more mass murders, says Dr. Park Dias, a psychiatrist warns that you don't have to blare out the story continually throughout the day. You should never show photographs of the killer, as there are other mediums to find this out. Why does there have to be 24/7 coverage on such a story. Why must you make the 'total body count' the lead story of the day. Why continuously say it is the 2nd worst school shooting in U.S. history? A copy-cat killer would want to make his kill the number 1 worst school shooting in U.S. history. Any crazy man that wanted to make the history books for his name to forever be known will perpetrate such a crime.  Stories that surfaced throughout the last week of other crazy people such as the one with a crazy man with 47 guns in his possession definitely has allot more fire power to kill more than 20 people.
The fact is that I'm proud to live in a free country, but is the country too free? Why does it have to take a tragedy such as this at an elementary school in a small town that many people never heard off, but now makes the national news and will forever be linked to the elementary school tragedy? Why does the topic of gun control have to be continuously revisited each time a tragedy like this occurs and then nothing gets done. There will now be continued stories about gun control, but Congress now must focus on the major issue facing them and that's the 'fiscal cliff' issue. Congress had to delay their holiday vacations because they need to get the fiscal cliff issue resolved before the end of the year, now just two weeks away. Congress IS the biggest procrastinating body of people I've ever seen. Obviously nothing will be done on gun control until the new Congress convenes after the first of the year, and just how many more stories will surface on shootings before then? As you can see, this story is full of questions, and every one of them is legitimate and needs to be answered.
President Obama works continuously trying to get bills passed, as he has been doing in an attempt to avoid the fiscal cliff, but Congress continues to buck the issues as they have for the last 2 plus years now. Yes, this Congress surely made the history books of being the #1 'do-nothing' Congress of all time. I hope the Senators in Congress are proud of themselves. I surely don't expect anything different when the new Congress convenes in January and that will not help the issues surrounding the elementary school shooting.


President Obama - Official Vote by the Electoral College

Monday, December 17, 2012

Today marked the official vote by the electoral college where official ballots are cast from congressional districts in every state. The electors cast their votes for the candidate who received the majority of the votes in their state. Back on November 6, Obama reached the electoral college threshold of 270 votes out of a total of 538 electoral votes. At the end of election night, Obama had 332 electoral votes and Romney had 207, in a winning percentage over Romney of 51% to 47%. The voting always takes place on the Monday after the second Wednesday in December, as required by the U.S. Constitution.


Gun Laws to be Revisited in Wake of Newtown Connecticut Shooting

Friday, December 14, 2012

So will now be the time that leaders have the courage to participate in meaningful discussion about gun laws? Not log ago, Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was gunned down in Tucson in 2011. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (@NancyPelosi) tweeted, "No words can console the parents of the children murdered at Sandy Hook. We share our prayers and our grief over these horrifying events." Comments like those made by Nancy Pelosi are echoed time and time again, but still the violence never seems to stop. This time in Connecticut it was innocent children, in their elementary school, 20 victims between the ages of 5 and 10 years old now dead.
So a call for gun limits are now echoing again, but will the call fall on deaf ears? Other such incidents, the Columbine High School shooting in 1999 and just recently in Aurora, Colorado in 2012, are just added horrific and heartbreaking incidents that affect everyone. Yesterday it was an Oregon mall shooting. This time, parents all across the country are affected, wondering if their children are safe at their school. The TV reporters are passing the word that the children are safe in schools, but how can the news media make such false accusations now, especially since this happened in such a small community  in an elementary school just this evening in a small town of just 27,000 people.
Do all schools, no matter where they are located, have metal detectors? The fear now is that there may be copy-cat killers wanting to carry out a similar crime.
How do you limit guns when you have the second amendment to the Constitution giving the people the right to keep and bear arms? You have a right to possess a firearm, but will they limit the sales of them or should they?
In some states, you don't even have to give your name. All you have to do in the state of Texas for example, is to first decide what type of gun you want to purchase. Shotguns and Rifles are easier to purchase than handguns. Then you have to pass an FBI NICS background check, which is required by law. But you are allowed to possess a firearm on the premises where you live after 5 years have elapsed since your prison or parole term has ended. They use whichever term is later.
There is no waiting period in Texas when you buy the gun from the dealer. If you passed the FBI NICS background check and receive your CHL (if required), you can walk out of the store threat same day with your gun.
After shootings similar to the school shooting, the purchase of hand guns, especially since the news reporters have reported which types of guns used, become popular and sales rise dramatically. It is my opinion that gun control laws must change in the State of Texas, and sales should be limited. The Second Amendment to the Constitution still guarantees the right to bear arms, but it should not give users of firearms the right to target innocent victims for a kill. Presently, there is no way to stop a cold calculated killer from using his guns illegally  so essentially we are giving purchasers of handguns their right to do what they please, at a consequence which always seems too late to make a difference. .


School Tragedy in Connecticut - 20 Children Killed

At approximately 9:30AM Eastern time, a tragedy unfolded in Newtown Connecticut. Sandy Hook Elementary School will now forever be known as one of the worst school shootings and tragedies in American History, located in a small peaceful town of just 27,000 residents 60 miles northeast of New York City.
There were 28 people killed, one off of the school campus, including the gunman found dead in one of the classrooms. Twenty children, between the ages of 5 and 7 years of age, five people employed by the school including the principal, Dawn Hochsprung were killed, including the gunman who pulled the gun on himself at the end.
Just 10 days to go before Christmas, and almost two dozen families lost a child in this tragedy.
When the President was informed about the tragedy, he addressed the public in a tearful message, stating "Our Hearts are broken today" and called for "meaningful action" to prevent such shootings. He ordered that flags be flown at half mast today.
The tragedy unfolds further as the gunman, Adam Lanza, age 20 from New Jersey, walked into what was originally thought to be his moms classroom at this school and just started shooting. Further investigation proved that his mother was not employed by the school. The mother of Adam Lanza, Nancy Lanza was also found dead today at her home. Adam Lanza shot and killed his mother just prior to driving to the school with three guns, all registered to his mother. An investigation including questions of Adam's brother, 24 year old Ryan who is now in police custody for questioning. Other people, including one of his friends and his girlfriend is still missing in New Jersey.
The following is the video of President Obama as he made statements concerning the tragedy at the elementary school.


Susan Rice Steps down as a Choice for Secretary of State

Thursday, December 13, 2012

Susan Rice - Permanent U.N. Ambassador
In a most recent turn of events concerning the choices of a new Secretary of State to replace Hilary Clinton during President Obama's second term as President, the one person who most fills the bill has decided to withdraw her name from consideration. John Kerry most likely will now receive the nomination from the President. Why did she change her mind? It was because of a  Republican controversy surrounding her name to be the nominee by President Obama. Susan Rice wrote a letter to the president and has decided to withdraw her name from the possible list of candidates. It was not a decision that the White House helped her with, rather than a self calculated decision to withdraw at this time. Her involvement surrounding the Benghazi issue had everything to do with her decision.
Led by John McCain, the Republicans did everything possible to say that she was not qualified to do the job of Secretary of State, just because she did her job to report on Benghazi as she was told. She provided the best information that she had at the time, but the Republicans, led by McCain said that she was misleading and that she made mistakes in her reporting, thus she is not qualified to be the next Secretary of State.
To me, the Republicans led by McCain himself should be ashamed of their actions. The only thing the Republican party now seems to represent is to block everything that President Obama wants, and this action is proof that the Republicans plan no changes on how they will think during the second term.
Was Susan Rice truly qualified to become Secretary of State? I say that she is qualified and here is just a glimpse of her resume, someone truly educated, someone who should be considered the best of the best.

1) Served under Bill Clinton and was recommended that he tap Rice for a high-level State Department post on African affairs in the late 1990's.

2) Valedictorian of her class with "superior leadership skills: and "left behind a remarkable legacy" "that included a revised honor code still used at the school," John Wood wrote.

3) A Bachelors degree with Phi Beta Kappa honors at Stanford University while she also won a Rhodes Scholarship to study international relations at Oxford University in 1986.

6) At Oxford, she earned the Chatham House-British International Studies Association Prize for the top doctoral dissertation in the United Kingdom in international relations.

7) An international management consultant position at McKinsey and Company in Toronto, Canada.

8) Director of International organizations and peacekeeping in 1993 in Washington, DC.

9) In 1994, she toured the war-torn country of Rwanda after the genocide campaign there killed at least 800,000 people in a little over three months time.

10) In 1995, she became a special assistant to the president and senior director of African affairs at the White House National Security Council.

11) A senior fellow in 2002 at Brookings, specializing in the study of U.S. foreign relations.

12) National security and foreign relations adviser for Obama's 2008 campaign.

13) Became a U.N. Ambassador as President Obama called her "a close and trusted adviser" and said she "shares my belief that the U.N. is an indispensable -- and imperfect -- forum."

14) Washington insiders characterize her as being very ambitious and aggressive, very personable, likable, charming, smart, funny and down to earth.

15) Very serious and someone you do not want to cross or get in the way off, which some may say is to her advantage or something against her, but in any case, very determined to do her job well.

Even after the false accusations by the Republicans led by John McCain, who apparently still seems to be upset for loosing the Presidential race to Barack Obama in 2008, still shows his resentment and apparently tried to make others feel as miserable as he most certainly is now.

In light of all of what has happened, President Obama has accepted Susan Rice's decision not to accept the position of Secretary of State if it was ever going to be offered to her, but the President also made the following statement...

"I have every confidence that Susan has limitless capability to serve our country now and in the years to come, and know that I will continue to rely on her as an adviser and friend," the president said. "While I deeply regret the unfair and misleading attacks on Susan Rice in recent weeks, her decision demonstrates the strength of her character, and an admirable commitment to rise above the politics of the moment to put our national interests first."

It is just too bad that warmonger John McCain doesn't have the same interests, as he would rather be a warmonger and keep our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, and is in favor of prolonging the wars. Just because he happened to serve in a prior war, and was a prisoner for a length of time, doesn't make him qualified to be Secretary of State, but thinks that it gives him the right to judge others. In recent comments made by John McCain, he felt that it was no ones business on the decisions he makes and openly stated the fact that recently in an interview and that others should not judge him. Instead, that gives him at age 76 the right as the judge and jury for Susan Rice. In light of a few of his most recent decisions, maybe it was good that he wasn't elected President in 2008.


WorldNetDaily and Patriot Voices

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

"WorldNetDaily" (, which is an internet news and commentary site founded in May of 1997, is a conservative site which has been used during the last presidential election in an attempt to distort the fact centered around president Obama. Case in fact. A site which now sides on the 'sore looser' side of the 2012 elections, sports a headline that can be found at the URL is published proof of the ridiculousness of such a site.

As the site states...

"Still, members of the president’s team did everything possible to rig the game in their favor. They took liberties with the law Republicans would never dare attempt and obstructed voter-integrity efforts at every turn, while the vast political-media-entertainment-education-union-nonprofit complex went all in to promote Obama’s narrative."

"Democrats and their media allies also engaged in what has fairly been described as a dishonest and “vicious” campaign to discredit the Republican nominee while steadfastly  shielding the administration from its many scandals. Any of these could have sunk Obama’s reelection prospects had the media reported them with the enthusiasm they showed in attacking and spreading disinformation about Romney".

Even with this said, the site listed excuses as to why the President won re-election, including that there was low voter turnout, only 60% in the last three elections compared to a communistic country such as Iraq, where all the people are required to vote in every election. The claim is that almost 100% of the people in Iraq voted. Now how could that be possible in a country so torn up by war that many citizens elect not to leave their homes in fear of their own lives. At least towards the end of the article, 'WorldNetDaily' claims that voter fraud most likely didn't happen.

In proof that the Republican party seems to show signs of a possible breakup, Conservative candidate Rich Santorum back in June prior to the election, announced a new conservative group called 'Patriot Voices'. What does he expect from this organization? How about to" "service people left behind by both parties" and to tout many of the issues he espoused during his run for the GOP presidential nomination." Rick Santurum feels it's his obligation to speak out, but when when he speak in favor of his own party.

So here you have it, a site called 'WorldNetDaily' and another called 'Patriot Voices'. Yes, people have the right to startup sites as I have when I started 'Obama in the WhiteHouse' back in 2007, but at what gain. It is undetermined that these two conservative websites could actually help the Republican cause in 2016, but do you think that they actually want too. It seems that maybe they have their own mission.

As far as this 'Obama in the White House' website produced by me, I fully expect the site to be active on the web throughout President Obama's second turn to commence on January 20, 2013, and long after the conclusion of his second term. It should be available for many years to come for the readers interested in what happened during President Obama's term.


Republicans Threaten President Obama

Pardon my French, but what the hell are the Republicans thinking when they have decided to threaten with a political war next year?! Do they have an ounce of sense in their heads. They are now aiming to hurt themselves besides the middle class. Do you remember last year when they failed to reach a solution to raise the debt ceiling. Do the Republicans think that the President will cave in regarding the debt ceiling. The President gave the Republicans two respites on 2 different issues last year, namely the 'tax cuts' and the 'debt ceiling', temporarily extending the agreements so that the country could survive another year. Well that year is up, and the money is quickly running out, and the debt ceiling must be addressed again. Conservative Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, promised the newly re-elected Obama a "rude awakening" next year if the president forces through his plan for high-income earners to pay more taxes without agreeing to substantive steps to reduce the nation's chronic federal deficits and debt. Does that sound like a threat? So the President must bow down to the Republican wishes just so that the debt ceiling issue would be addressed by the Republicans next year. Again, what planet does Lindsey Graham live on? The debt ceiling will be addressed whether Mr. Graham likes it or not, as will the tax issue before the end of this year. The tax issue will be resolved, and so will the debt issue. Extending threats like this to the President in a time when so many people are hurting these days, threatening to take things away from them is nothing short of political suicide. The 2014 elections will be very interesting when they arrive.
Instead of the threats floating around by the Republicans, what the right wing party needs to do is go out and find a respectable candidate to face whomever will be running on the Democratic side in 2016. At the present time, the Democrats already have a very qualified candidate in someone named 'Hilary Clinton', and if she were to actually run for president in 2016, the Republicans have no-one of that stature to run against her, and then we will have the first woman President of the United States. This was echoed recently by a prior Republican candidate named Newt Gingrich. He stated, "If their competitor in 2016 is going to be Hilary Clinton, supported by Bill Clinton and presumably still popular Barack Obama, trying to will that would truly be like the 'super bowl' and the Republican party of today is incapable of competing at that level." Hilary has stated that she will not run in 2016, but she needs a year or so away from her present job as Secretary of State and then she may just change her mind, especially after she gets a respite from politics for a while. Like the saying goes, you can't teach an old dog new tricks, but it also is a saying that you cannot break an old dog of their habits  Hillary still will have politics in her blood, and I fully expect her to run again for President. Even if Hilary doesn't run, the Democrats will have the upper hand and stand a clear chance of winning the House of Representatives back from the Republicans, especially if the Republicans continue to try and threaten the president and the country by stalling on the debt ceiling issue. Who can forget what happened because of the last delay?. The Federal Reserve lowered the credit rating of the United States from AAAA to AAA. If the rating is lowered again, it will be almost impossible for the U.S. to ever get the debts paid off and the it will affect everyone. The only way that the Republicans feel that the debt can be lowered, is not to raise taxes on the rich, but to address entitlements, cuts in Medicare and Social Security, the latter two affecting the middle class and the poor. Great thinking Republicans, but the party needs to be reinvented, and the tea party needs to be banished. There is no law against having a difference of opinion on things which is what the Republican and Democratic parties are all about, but why does everything that the Congress does these days have to affect the middle class and people just trying to survive. The middle class people must work to survive, while a good portion of the rich just sit back and collect monies from their investments.
It's the American way I guess, but you don't have to take my word for it, but if the Republicans to come around and start doing something constructive in their voting processes, then the President in 2014 will surely gain total control once again with entire the U.S. Congress going Democrat once again as it was in 2008 when the President was elected in his first term.


O'Connell Plan Defeated by O'Connell

Monday, December 10, 2012

It looks like a budget deal is near. The long national nightmare might almost be over. Another thing being talked about in Washington these days is the debt ceiling. The White House has been putting a plan together to take away the control of the debt ceiling from Congress. Without being able to control the debt ceiling, the Congress wouldn't be able to blow up the world economy. Everything the Congress seems to vote on these days, seems to blow up in everyone's face. Here's something that was blown up before it was even voted on.
Introduced by Republican Senator Mitch O'Connell, the plan is based on the idea that he himself proposed back in 2011. But the interesting thing is that he is actually not for his own plan at this time. He was also hoping that Democrats also did not support it, but a few days ago, he asked the Senate to move to an immediate vote on the McConnell plan. He was figuring that the majority leader would back down, but what actually happened is that the Senate majority leader did not back down, but instead actually embraced the idea of a vote on the McConnell plan. The majority leader wanted an immediate up or down vote. He also said that there would be no filibuster, and no 60 vote requirement needed. It the bill would get 51 votes, it would be passed. So what do you think what happened next.
In complete shock that the Senate was about to vote on his bill at that moment, he did something that was never seen before. He just decided to filibuster his own bill, saying that if there wasn't going to be a 60 vote threshold, there would be no vote at all. In other words, with a 60 vote measure, his bill would surely fail. When was the last time that you think some Senator introduced his bill and voted on it to fail? So here you go. More political games. So what had actually happened is that he asked for a vote on a plan that he created, immediately got his wish, then filibustered his own plan. Talk about turning around 180 degrees. It goes to prove that they don't even try to pass bills, but only to recommit to their own base that they will not vote on much during the lame duck session in Congress. Will the new Congress do better next year. Unfortunately, I don't have much faith in our political leaders now, and no-one else should too. Yes, most likely the Congress will get a permanent debt ceiling bill passed by the end of the year, and in some instances, the Republicans want the bill passed too, just so that they can put this one behind them, but also know that the debt ceiling issue would now be owned by the President. If the economy failed, then the President would be blamed. This is the reasoning of Senator Rand Paul, not taking in consideration that when the same thing was done in the Clinton administration, the rich were paying more taxes than they are right now, and the middle class people benefit.                                                                                                                                                  


Polls Opinion by the Editor of 'Obama in the White House' Blog

Saturday, December 8, 2012

Opinion of the Editor....

Each month new labor statistics come out, and for the most part, they show a continued growth in jobs since President Obama has been in office. Now the statistics show 146,000 jobs added in November, bringing the unemployment rate down to 7.7%. It sounds so great, but all you have to do is dig into the reports a little more to find out that not every state is feeling the goodness. How about Nevada, with the worst unemployment rate, setting at 11.5%, then Rhode Island at 10.4%. To me, it is utterly amazing how this country seems to respond on polls. Then you look at North Dakota at 3.1% and Nebraska at 3.8% unemployment rates. The country is divided, and unless the U.S. Congress gets their act together, rates may just rise again, and going over the 'fiscal cliff' will not help things. If it happens, what will the law makers say was the cause? The Republicans will say that it wasn't them who let the economy go over the cliff, but it was President Obama. The President and the Democrats will point fingers at the Republicans. The U.S. was downgraded in their credit rating from AAAA to AAA just a year ago because the Congress couldn't get their act together. Do the law makers realize this? But instead of tackling the problem staring them in the face, for starters the Congress decided to go home early this week. Some of the representatives will go home and talk to their constituents to try and understand what they want their representatives to do, but others will just go home to rest from their "hard job" of 'doing-nothing.
I am sick and tired of the polls, as you look at them one way, for example seeing that the unemployment rate is dropping, but if you look at the whole picture, you will see that almost half as many Americans just stopped looking for work, so they are not counted anymore. The Democrats know this, the President knows this, and the Republicans know it. When will it be time for the Congress to really give Americans some real good news about what we really need to hear, instead of constantly make everyone feel scared, worrying what will happen next? Why must Americans enter the Christmas season not knowing what is going to happen to their 401K's after the holidays?
What I've learned is that you cannot trust the lawmakers anymore. The President is standing his ground, to prove his point that the Congress cannot continue to temporarily fix the problems. Permanent tax cuts need to be put in place and this President doesn't need to visit this issue again in his second term. The Congress must also realize that they are now put on the spot, not President Obama. He will be around for the next 4 years, and the Congressional leaders who will be up for re-election in 2014 may be gone in just 2 years if we go over the cliff. The leader of the House Boener is feeling the heat right now from the American people, but he doesn't know what heat is unless he continues to not get things done, especially if he doesn't find a way to get his House to approve a tax plan that President Obama will sign.
If things are not done, the President will have the power to do things on his own, but at this time he seems willing to let the American process work. It has to work, but it is really disheartening that all you hear in the news is what the Congress doesn't do.  Will there ever come a time when the Democrats and Republicans will agree on something?


Is the Fiscal Cliff Real, and What Are the Effects

Saturday, December 1, 2012

There is a question floating around whether President Obama will be responsible for pushing the country over the fiscal cliff. The answer is 'NO'. At the present time, both Democrats and Republicans are in a face-off and in the present situation, noone is going to win. The Republicans are not willing to sign off on a permanent tax hike on the rich, people making over $250,000, but seem to be willing to let the middle class pay higher taxes instead. The Democrats don't seem to want to budge from the President's stance, which is to provide take breaks for the middle class and tax hikes for the rich. The Senate has already passed a bill to support the President's stance on taxes, but the House, led by Speaker John Boehner is not willing to even bring the vote to the floor.
The President has the upper hand after winning re-election, and will have even more clout to raise taxes on the rich if the Republicans fail to act soon. Even more-so, if the Republicans fail to act prior to next year, they stand a great chance in loosing the House in 2014. The ironic thing here is that the tax cuts will take place for the middle class, and most likely will be retroactive to Jan 1 if the tax cuts are not given to the middle class before January. Tax cuts are pretty certain to take place anyway.
In a scenario of no tax cuts through 2013, which seems to be virtually impossible, what would happen if there were no tax cuts for the middle class? For starters, by summer the country will plummet into another depression, one that the country may not be able to recover from and up to 700,000 jobs could be lost.

Here's a short list....

1) Starting at the top affecting the 1%'ers and stock market investors will be the maximum rate on long-term gains which will be increased from 15% to 20%. But in an unbelievable turn of events, maximum rates on dividends will go sky high to nearly 40%.

2) Dividend taxes on the two lowest income brackets who now pay 0% will rise to 10% on long-term gains, and almost 30% on dividends. If you are an investor, your life has to really suck right now. The future in investments are bleak unless Congress acts very soon.

3) Like other analysts, Macroeconomic Advisers NOV.29th article predicts that the “Doing Nothing” approach would cripple the short-term economy: Unemployment would rise to 8.5 percent by the end of 2013; the stock market would fall about 15 percent in the beginning of the year and barely recover; and GDP growth would be anemic.

4) After 2013, economic growth starts to pick up again, but the severe fiscal contraction from the “fiscal cliff” would lower GDP growth and raise unemployment for the next decade. 2013 will most likely be a living hell for most.

After all the stir about the effects of the fiscal cliff, how tone deaf are the Republicans? Republican Newt Gingrich leads the pack.

All you have to do is look at a blog post on 'Gingrich Productions' belonging to Gingrich.  He believes that the fiscal cliff is just something made up by the Democrats and the news media, and is just a figment of our imagination. It's probably just as much as a figmant in his eyes as his manning the moon with human population which is now just a figment of our imagination. To read his outlandish post in his blog, go to this URL for the full text....

Read more about the fiscal cliff on another article on this blog at


McCain and Company continuing to Push the Country towards the 'Fiscal Cliff'

Continuing with a relentless attack on the United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice, the three Senators earning the name of the 'Three Stooges' are continuing to display their shameful behavior. Do they really have a case against the Ambassador? The real answer is 'NO'. But what this whole scenario represents is a continued GOP war against Barack Obama, which apparently will last for the next four years. No American who is familiar with the shenanigans of  Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte would even believe that this is really about Susan Rice. But she has become the scapegoat of the first Republican offensive against President Barack Obama since the Presidential election.
These tactics are nothing new from the Republican Senators, and to me it's just amazing how this governing group would be allowed to deliberately attempt to do everything they can to make President Obama look bad. This is so obvious to the voters. Presently, these good for nothing Senators are still holding out on the tax cuts for the middle class just because they are not for the rich gaining more responsibility to do their fair share with raised taxes, similar to the rates that the upper class owned during the Clinton presidency. But what will happen if the fiscal cliff is not avoided will be that the Republican ignorance will backfire on them. Continued 'do-nothing-tactics will earn these Senators a loss for their Senate seat in 2016.
The bottom line here is that the Senators refuse to believe that they must deal with a democratic president named Barack Obama for the next four years. What they don't realize is that if they do not start delivering in Congress for the betterment of the people and not for their own personal interests, their actions will affect every person, regardless if you are from the middle class or not.


Can You Ever Forget the Flip-Flopper - Romney?

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

Why did Mitt Romney loose?

The overwhelming question concerning the man was "Can we trust him?"

1) He says that he opposed the President's stimulus, "No time, Nowhere, No How", after he was quoted for saying "I think there is need for economic stimulus".

He flipped so many times on the issues, that people doubted his character.

Here is more proof...

2) Has he flip-flopped on abortion?  First he says he will choose to respect the right for the woman to choose..(Pro Choice)  But then he says, "the right next step in the fight to preserve the sanctity of life is to see 'Roe vs. Wade' be overturned.(Anti-Choice).

First, he is pro-choice, then he is pro-life.

3) He showed his true colors when he mentioned that he was against Reagan, when is says that he was an "independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush" (Against Ronald Reagan). But then he says "that the principles that Ronald Reagan espoused are as true today as they were when he spoke them" (For Ronald Reagan).

3) "In 1985 I helped found a company. I learned how America competes with companies from other countries". But then what does he does with Bain Capital? He shut down companies, liquidating their assets and firing their American workers. He says that "I think you'll find that I've been as consistent as human beings can be" and then he says "if you are looking for someone who has never changed on any positions on any policies, I'm not your guy."

4) Then his fellow Republican and fellow candidate Rick Perry was quoted " I think Americans just don't know sometimes which Mitt Romney they're dealing with.

5) Was he very likable  On the front cover of a Time Magazine sported Mitt Romney's picture with the headline posed in a question, "WHY DON"T THEY LIKE ME? He spent little or no time doing interviews on the TV, whereas the other candidates worked the Sunday news shows circuit like a real politician. He often bypassed reporters on the rope lines  refusing to answer questions, making people to wonder what he was hiding. When he actually had a personal television interview, it was disastrous.

6) He received million dollar donations and the (fake) companies just suddenly ceased to exist. He wanted people just to donate money or make people believe that they were actually donating money while he just stayed in the shadows. In all actually, the chuck of his funds came from his buddies on Wall Street. He said " To get that kind of money, you have to cozy up as an incumbent to all of the special interest groups who can go out and raise money for you from their members." "That kind of relationship has an influence on the way that you are going to vote."  But then in another breathe, he says "I'm not going to spend my time going after Ben Bernakie. I'm not going to take my effort and focus on the Federal Reserve." Then he says that Ben Bernakie is doing a great job and he thinks it's important to have the Fed as an independent agency. He said that he doesn't want to have the Congress of the United States try to pull strings at the Fed.

7) In a statement made on the Fox News Channel, the narrator said that "personality wise he comes across as if he was designed by German scientists to be an 'android' politician.

8) Donations from Mitt Romney lobbyists were more than all of the other Republican candidates combined, he alone at 51.6%, Tim Pawlenty coming in second at 23.7%, then Jon Huntsman at 11.8%, Newt Gingrich at 9.6% and then Rick Santorum with the least number of lobbyists.

9) Then there was health care. He said that what he did in Massachusetts  that he put together an exchange, and he was glad to see the President copying it. But then he said "Obamacare is bad news, and if I'm President of the United States, I will repeal it." He was for it when he was governor, but since President Obama wants the same coverage for all Americans, he is now against it.

10) Then there was the issue on immigration. He said that "I don't think that I hired an illegal in my life" but then 2 minutes and 14 seconds later in a debate with Perry, he says " We hired a lawn company to come and mow our lawn. They had illegal immigrants that were working for them." Is that a stroke of genius on Mitt Romney's part or what?!?!?!?!!!!??????

11) On the subject of climate change, he said "I believe the world is getting warmer. I believe that humans contribute to that." Then later he says, "My view is that we don't know what is causing climate change on this planet."

He seems to change positions on the issues because of political expedience. He changed his positions regarding unions.

12) He says that he would be proud to sign a 'no new taxes' pledge, but then he says that "I'm proud to be the only Republican candidate for President to sign the tax pledge." So first he said that he wouldn't, but then he actually did.

13) As Governor of Massachusetts, he signed into law a bill extending the ban for assault weapons, but then he said " I do not support any new legislation of weapon band nature." How can he so blatantly flip-flop on the issue of assault weapons, but he did.

Even the late night TV hosts can joke about Mitt Romney, saying that he's against the Mitt Romney of just 4 months ago.

14) He says that TARP was the right thing to do. So then guess what he says next.  "TARP aught to be ended."

15) Mitt Romney tried to take credit for the auto industry, when he was prepared to let the auto industry die, as he put it "Let Detroit go bankrupt".

16) After all of what was just mentioned, then he says, "I think people understand that I'm a man of steadiness and consistency  Oh my....  

Actually, it's probably a good thing that now the Presidential campaign is over, as now we no longer need to listen to a thing he has to say, and whether he now flip-flops more on the issues, it really doesn't matter. I can go out on a limb here with certainty that he will never again run for President. Will the Republican party learn from such a candidate of Mitt Romney, or will they be ready to do it all over again. Will their principles change, from being so leftist so that they can pull votes from the Democrats the next time. Why, because if they do not figure out a way to do it, they will just loose again in 2016.


The Fiscal Cliff - Can It Be Avoided?


There is lots of information out there on the web that will give you an idea as to whether or not the Fiscal Cliff will be avoided. The President is doing everything he can to get the Republicans to accept the fact that taxes on the rich have to become a reality, or is he?

As stated in a 'CNNMoney' article, it's just too early to know what truly is going to happen, and for the people who depend on the Congressional leaders to create laws that will benefit everyone, it's very obvious to all the people that Congress is now set to continue in performing in their 'do-nothing' ways.

All they seem to do is argue about everything, and when things get difficult for making real concrete decisions, permanent ones that they will have to stand by, they just seem to give up, and take a recess, or go on vacation. How is it that this governing body can just leave their unfinished work behind and just decide to go on vacation and in other words say 'to hell with it' or 'we'll vote on it when we come back' knowing full well when they come back after eating their thanksgiving turkey or their Christmas traditional dinner, that they will not be any further than before they left.

I'm not saying that the Democrats or the Republicans do not want to deal together, but our Democracy demands that something come out for the benefit of the people and the lawmakers of the country are ultimately responsible for what happens. The President alone cannot make the laws himself. He depends on that Congressional governing body to approve of the laws that he signs into law with a simple stroke of a pen.

Recently he has attended a White House meeting with the media, and has explained that the fiscal cliff can be easily avoided with the stroke of a pen he was sporting at the meeting. In the past just a few years ago, the President renewed the Bush tax cuts which was just a temporary measure, but now it's time for a permanent law to take effect so that Americans are not constantly burdened or put in a constant state of panic when it comes to tax hikes.

Nevertheless, the lawmakers seem bent in doing nothing, and the following are the reasons as stated in a 'CNNMoney' article as to “why the fiscal cliff won't get resolved easily.”

1. President Obama insists on a tax rate increase on those earning $250,000 or more, and House Republicans balk.
2. President Obama and Democrats refuse to accept revenue increases that won't be scored by the Congressional Budget Office -- i.e. that depend upon tax reform and/or upon an assumed increase in economic growth.
3. Republicans won't accept another extension of the temporary 2% payroll tax cut for working Americans. So President Obama may insist on a Making Work Pay tax credit much like the one from the 2009 stimulus package. That credit was worth up to $400 for single workers earning less than $95,000 and up to $800 for married couples making less than $190,000.
4. House Republicans insist on entitlement cuts that Senate Democrats won't accept. Senate Democrats see Social Security as completely off the table, and Medicare cuts will be difficult to achieve because most of the easier ones were used to pay for health care reform.
5. Everyone wants to repeal the $109 billion sequester of defense and non-defense spending, but Republicans may object if it's not "paid for."
6. Democrats want bigger defense cuts than Republicans will accept.
7. Discretionary spending can be shaved a bit more, but not much more without incurring Democratic opposition.
  1. Republicans may refuse to accept a debt ceiling increase that is not "paid for." A one-year hike would cost about $1.2 trillion. There's no way they could pay for that.


Obama Continues to Push on Tax hikes for the Rich

President Obama doesn't seem to want to wait for the continued slow decisions of Congress and seems intent in bringing his case of tax hikes for the rich to the people. Presently, he is continuing his effort with building pressure on the U.S. Congress through public support as he flies around the country, because it seems that Congress seems willing to let the Bush Tax Cuts expire by the end of this year.
President Obama continues to build his case with others including small-business owners on Tuesday,, returning Wednesday to host an event at the White House to highlight how “middle-class Americans who would be impacted' if Congress fails to reach a deficit reduction agreement by the year's end.
Besides trying to implement tax cuts, the Congress is trying to figure out on how to raise revenue at the same time in a package deal. But it seems as if the Congress is running out of time, as the tax hikes are set to kick in for every American starting on January 1, 2013.
The President is not letting down, and seems determined to make sure that the middle-class people continue to have no hike in taxes while proposing a tax hike for Americans making above $250,000.

Now here is the kicker. Most people do not understand how the tax hikes for the people making over $250,000 works. Let's say that a business owner makes $260,000 for the year. He will not be taxed at a higher rate on the entire $260,000 but would only be taxed at a higher rate for the mere $10,000 over the $250,000 that he made. If the business owner make $500,000 for the year, he would be taxed at a higher rate for only $250,000 of his income. Some business owners claim that they will refuse to pay the higher rates, therefore they would have to limit their business income. A few say that they will make sure to only make $249,999, just so they don't have to pay the higher tax. That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. As an example of the extra tax, a family or a business with income between $250,000 and $300,00 in taxable income would on average owe an additional $199 for the year, and this is in according to projections drawn from Census and IRS data by the progressive Citizens for Tax Justice. That works out to $16 a month, enough to reduce the number of afternoon stops at Starbucks but not so devastating that the beach vacation gets canceled.  


The Effects of the Pending 'Fiscal Cliff'

Saturday, November 24, 2012

What is this 'fiscal cliff' everyone is talking about? Is it important to prevent 'going over the cliff' and how will if effect everyone?


Fiscal cliff” is the popular shorthand term used to describe the conundrum that the U.S. government will face at the end of 2012, when the terms of the Budget Control Act of 2011 are scheduled to go into effect.
Among the laws set to change at midnight on December 31, 2012, are the end of last year’s temporary payroll tax cuts (resulting in a 2% tax increase for workers), the end of certain tax breaks for businesses, shifts in the alternative minimum tax that would take a larger bite, the end of the tax cuts from 2001-2003, and the beginning of taxes related to President Obama’s health care law. At the same time, the spending cuts agreed upon as part of the debt ceiling deal of 2011 will begin to go into effect. According to Barron's, over 1,000 government programs - including the defense budget and Medicare are in line for "deep, automatic cuts."
In a nutshell, Everyone who pays income tax — and some who don’t — will feel it.
So will doctors who accept Medicare, people who get unemployment aid, defense contractors, air traffic controllers, national park rangers and companies that do research and development.
The package of tax increases and spending cuts known as the ‘‘fiscal cliff’’ takes effect in January unless Congress passes a budget deal by then. The economy would be hit so hard that it would likely sink into recession in the first half of 2013, economists say.
And no matter who you are, it will be all but impossible to avoid the pain.
Middle income families would have to pay an average of about $2,000 more next year, the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center has calculated.
Up to 3.4 million jobs would be lost, the Congressional Budget Office estimates. The unemployment rate would reach 9.1 percent from the current 7.9 percent. Stocks could plunge. The nonpartisan CBO estimates the total cost of the cliff in 2013 at $671 billion.
Collectively, the tax increases would be the steepest to hit Americans in 60 years when measured as a percentage of the economy.
‘‘There would be a huge shock effect to the US economy,’’ says Mark Vitner, an economist at Wells Fargo.
Most of the damage — roughly two-thirds — would come from the tax increases. But the spending cuts would cause pain, too.
The bleak scenario could push the White House and Congress to reach a deal before year’s end. On Tuesday, Congress returns for a post-election session that could last through Dec. 31. At a minimum, analysts say some temporary compromise might be reached, allowing a final deal to be cut early next year.
Still, uncertainty about a final deal could cause many companies to further delay hiring and spend less. Already, many US companies say anxiety about the fiscal cliff has led them to put off plans to expand or hire.
A breakdown in negotiations could also ignite turmoil in financial markets, Vitner said. It could resemble the 700-point fall in the Dow Jones industrial average in 2008 after the House initially rejected the $700 billion bailout of major banks.
Since President Barack Obama’s re-election, nervous investors have sold stocks. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index sank 2.3 percent last week, its worst weekly drop since June. The sell-off resulted in part from anxiety over higher tax rates on investment gains once the fiscal cliff kicks in.
Last week, Obama said he was open to compromise with Republican leaders. But the White House said he would veto any bill that would extend tax cuts on income above $250,000.
Republican House Speaker John Boehner countered that higher tax rates on upper-income Americans would slow job growth. Boehner argued that any deal must reduce tax rates, eliminate special-interest loopholes and rein in government benefits.
The US government has run annual budget deficits in excess of $1 trillion in each of the last four fiscal years. A report Tuesday showed the government started the 2013 budget year with a $120 billion deficit in October, suggesting a fifth $1 trillion annual deficit is likely.
That adds pressure on Obama and Congress to reach a budget deal.
Still, most economists want an agreement that would lower the deficit gradually over several years, rather than a sharp cut that could rattle the still-weak economy.
More than 50 percent of the tax increases would come from the expiration of tax cuts approved in 2001 and 2003 and from additional tax cuts in a 2009 economic stimulus law.
The first set of tax cuts reduced rates on income, investment gains, dividends and estates. They also boosted tax credits for families with children. Deductions for married couples also rose. The 2009 measure increased tax credits for low-income earners and college students.
About 20 percent of the tax increase would come from the expiration of a Social Security tax cut enacted in 2010. This change would cost someone making $50,000 about $1,000 a year, or nearly $20 a week, and a household with two high-paid workers up to $4,500, or nearly $87 a week.
The end of the Social Security tax cut isn’t technically among the changes triggered by the fiscal cliff. But because it expires at the same time, it’s included in most calculations of the fiscal cliff’s effects.
And it could catch many people by surprise.
‘‘Every worker in America is going to see a reduction in their paycheck in the first pay period of 2013,’’ Vitner noted.
An additional 20 percent of the tax increase would come from the end of about 80 tax breaks, mostly for businesses. One is a tax credit for research and development. Another lets companies deduct from their income half the cost of large equipment or machinery.
Mark Bakko, a Minneapolis accountant, says many mid-size companies he advises are holding off on equipment purchases or hiring until the fate of those tax breaks becomes clear. Bakko noted that the research and development credit typically lets a company that hired an engineer at a $100,000 salary cut its tax bill by $10,000. The credit has been routinely extended since the 1980s.
The rest of the tax increase would come mainly from the alternative minimum tax, or AMT. It would hit 30 million Americans, up from 4 million now.
The costly AMT was designed to prevent rich people from exploiting loopholes and deductions to avoid any income tax. But the AMT wasn’t indexed for inflation, so it’s increasingly threatened middle-income taxpayers. Congress has acted each year to prevent the AMT from hitting many more people.
Under the fiscal cliff, households in the lowest 20 percent of earners would pay an average of $412 more, the Tax Policy Center calculates. The top 20 percent would pay an average $14,000 more, the top 1 percent $121,000 more.
All this would lead many consumers to spend less. Anticipating reduced sales and profits, businesses would likely cut jobs. Others would delay hiring.
Another part of the cliff is a package of across-the-board spending cuts to defense and domestic programs — cuts the CBO says would total about $85 billion. Congress and the Obama administration agreed last year that these cuts would kick in if a congressional panel couldn’t agree on a deficit-reduction plan. The magnitude of the cuts was intended to force agreement. It didn’t.
Defense spending would shrink 10 percent. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has said those cuts would cause temporary job losses among civilian Pentagon employees and major defense contractors. Spending on weapons programs would be cut.
For domestic programs, like highway funding, aid to state and local governments and health research, spending would drop about 8 percent. Education grants to states and localities; the FBI and other law enforcement; environmental protection; and air traffic controllers, among others, would also be affected, the White House says.
Hospitals and doctors’ offices could also cut jobs if an $11 billion cut in Medicare payments isn’t reversed.
Extended unemployment benefits for about 2 million people would end. The extra benefits provide up to 73 weeks of aid.
‘‘It would be nice if we could ... address these issues before the very last moment,’’ said Donald Marron, the Tax Policy Center’s director.end of story marker


President Obama 2012 Schedule to Date

Thursday, November 22, 2012



Nov 17-20 Bangkok, Thailand; Rangoon, Burma; and Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Nov 7 Washington DC
Nov 6 Chicago IL
Nov 5 Columbus, OH; Des Moines, IA; and Chicago, IL
Nov 4 Concord, NH; Ft. Lauderdale, FL; Cincinnati, OH; Aurora, CO; and Madison, WI
Nov 3 Mentor, OH; Milwaukee, WI; Dubuque, IA; and Bristow, VA, Washington DC;
Nov 2 Hilliard, OH; Springfield, OH; and Lima, OH, Washington DC
Nov  1 Green Bay WI, Las Vegas, Denver CO, Columbus OH
Oct 31 Atlantic City New Jersey
Oct 30 Washington DC
Oct 29 Washington DC
Oct 27 Nashua NH
Oct 24 Davenport, IA, Denver, CO, and Las Vegas, NV
Oct 23 Boca Raton FL, Dayton OH
Oct 18 New York City
Sep   9 Melbourne, West Palm Beach Florida
Sep   8 St Petersburg, Kissimmee, Orlando Florida
Sep   7 Portsmouth NH, Cedar Rapids IA
Sep 5,6 Charlotte NC
Sep   4 Norfolk Virginia
Aug 31 El Paso Texas
Aug 28 Des Moines Iowa, Fort Collins Colorado
Aug 22 New York City
Aug 21 Columbus Ohio, Reno, Las Vegas Nevada
Aug 15 Moline Illinois
Aug 13 Omaha Nebraska
Aug   9 Colorado Springs Colorado
Aug   8 Denver, Grand Junction, Pueblo Colorado
Aug   6 Stamford CT, New York
Aug   2 Orlando Florida, Leesburg Virginia
Aug   1 Mansfield, Akron Ohio
July 30 New York City
July 25 New Orleans Louisiana
July 24 Portland OR, Seattle WA
July 23 San Francisco, Reno NV, Oakland CA
July 20 Fort Myers Florida
July 19 Jacksonville, West Palm Florida
July 17 San Antonio Austin Texas
July 16 Cincinnati Ohio
July 13 Norfolk, Hampton, Roanoke Virginia
July 10 Cedar Rapids Iowa
July 6  Pittsburgh, Washington DC, Camp David
July 5  Toledo Ohio
Jun 29 Colorado Springs
Jun 28 Walter Reed
Jun 26 Boston, Atlanta, Miami
Jun 25 Portsmouth NH
Jun 22 Orlando, Tampa Florida
Jun 18, 19 Mexico G8 Plenary Session
Jun 1 Golden Valley, Minnesota
May 24 San Jose CA, Newton Iowa
May 23 Colorado Springs & Denver, Colorado
May 21 Joplin Missouri
May 20 Chicago Illinois
May 18 Camp David G8 Summit
May 11 Reno Nevada
May 10 Seattle Washington, Los Angeles
May 8 Albany New york
Apr 27 Hinesville, Georgia
Apr 25 Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Apr 24 Chapel Hill, NC - Colorado
Apr 18 Ohio, Michigan
Apr 13 Cartagena Colombia, Summit of Americas
Apr 13 Tampa Florida
Apr 10 Palm Beach Florida
Mar 30 Burlington Vermont
Mar 24 - 27 Seoul S Korea
Mar 22 Cushing Oklahoma; Columbus Ohio
Mar 21 Boulder City Nevada; Roswell New Mexico;
Mar 16 Chicago Illinois
Mar 13 Dayton Ohio
Mar 9  Richmond Virginia
Mar 7  Charlotte North Carolina
Mar 1  Nashua New Hampshire, New York City
Feb 23 Miami Florida; Orlando Florida
Feb 16 San Diego California, San Francisco CaliforniaEverett Washington
Feb 15 Milwaukee Wisconsin; Los Angeles California
Feb 1 Falls Church Virginia
Jan 27 Detroit Michigan
Jan 26 Denver Colorado
Jan 25 Las Vegas Nevada
Jan 24 Cedar Rapids, Iowa & Phoenix Arizona
Jan 19 Orlando Florida Tourism Jobs


People say things that are Untrue, Just to Feel Better after the Election

Wednesday, November 21, 2012

The man who came in second place for Vice-President this year, Paul Ryan....

Paul Ryan says that President Obama won because of a high turnout in urban areas. The truth is that he is saying this because it makes him feel good. The fact is that President Obama did as well as Democrats usually do in swing states in urban areas. So the President did well there, and that was to be expected. Nothing was new there, but Paul Ryan claims that he knows why he and Mitt Romney didn't win the election. Not true. He doesn't seem to know a darn thing. He needs to come up with a better reason than that. If you look at the 8 swing states that the President won, the President only did marginally better in some of them then the last election running against John McCain, and in two states he actually did worse, and the state of Florida was really the only state where there was a significant increase. This was a state that the President didn't even have to win to win the election. So when Ryan says that the surprise urban turnout that happened this year makes makes him feel better about what happened, but it really doesn't explain WHY it happened. So his thesis is not true.
How about Mitt Romney in 2012 verses John McCain in 2008. Among liberals that are happy that Mitt Romney lost this year, and among conservatives that are claiming that they know the reasons why Mitt Romney lost, there has been a fair amount of bi-partisan Mitt Romney glee over the idea that Mitt Romney even received fewer votes for President than John McCain did in 2008. It turns out that this is not true. It may have looked like that on election night or on the day after the election, but millions of votes weren't counted right after the election, as it may take days and even weeks before you get all of the votes in after an election. The fact is that President Obama beat both Romney and McCain easily. It wasn't even a close election, but believe this or not, Mitt Romney was closer than John McCain. Mr. Romney did beat Mr. McCain in terms of the absolute number of ballots cast, which is neither exciting or may just be population growth depending on your perspective. But if someone tells you that John McCain got more votes than Mitt Romney, no matter why they are telling you this, it is definitely not true.
How about another guy named Dean Chambers. He ran the now famous for all the wrong reasons website "unskewed polls" ( That website became famous in the campaign for being hilariously but very self-confidently wrong about polling in the Presidential election. 'Unskewed polls' said that everyone else's polling assumptions were wrong, and if you fixed them, you would see just how much Mitt Romney was going to win the election by. 'Unskewed Polls' said that Mitt Romney was going to win the State of Florida by more than 4 points. He was supposed to win the state of New Hampshire by 2 points. Mitt Romney was supposed to win the State of Iowa by 3 points. There was supposed to be a Romney blowout in Virginia, as he was to win by 6 points. Mr. Romney did not win the states of Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire or Virginia, let alone by the margins that Dean Chambers predicted. Now, this website becomes the political standard for 'wrong' when it comes to polls. So now that he failed so miserably, what does he continue to do. He brings up a website called 'Barack O'Fraudo'. It's all about voter fraud, and that President Obama stole the election in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Florida. If you look at his map on the website, those four states are marked in black. The excuse of voter fraud is the reason why Dan Chambers says that President Obama won those states. So saying things in politics that make you feel good seems to be the norm on this website. But people need to look at the facts portrayed on this website to the facts that actually happened so they can learn from them. The website is a total joke.
Unfortunately from the Conservative side after the election, people must continue to bear with the lies that continue to come forward from this group of Americans that really don't really seem to know why they lost this year and also in the previous election. If they can't get it right, then how will they get it right for the next election in 2016?
The bottom line is that if the Republican base does not get a good leader and get that person soon, then 2016 and 2020 should be in the bag for the Democrats. President Obama had one of the least popular Presidents that ran for re-election but actually won. This fact is not secret. If there weren't a law stating that a  sitting President could only go for re-election only once, then I could safely say right now that the President could be re-elected again, unless the conservative movement could get their act together soon. Even with this said, until the Republican party becomes more organized on the issues and more realistic in their beliefs on a wide variety of subjects, they just will not win election in 2016, but the new Democratic candidate after President Obama will.


Weekly Address: Working Together to Extend the Middle Class Tax Cuts

Monday, November 19, 2012

Published on Nov 17, 2012 by 
President Obama urges Congress to act now on one thing that everyone agrees on -- ensuring that taxes don't go up on 98 percent of all Americans and 97 percent of small businesses at the end of the year. On Friday, the President had a constructive meeting with Congressional leaders on finding ways to reduce our deficit in a way that strengthens our economy and protects our middle class, and he looks forward to working together to get this done.


The President In Action After the Election

In the White house this past week, the President invited 14 middle class Americans to the White House to stand with him during a press conference that highlighted the next steps towards a continued economic recovery. On Veterans day, the President went to Arlington National Cemetery to honor the dead soldiers. But that was only the beginning of a trying week. He traveled to New York to continue to be part of the continuing cleanup effort from the effects and devastation caused by Hurricane Sandy.
On Friday, the President spoke to reporters in the east room with middle class Americans to try and convince Congressional Republicans to support an already Senate passed bill to prevent a tax hike on 97 percent of small businesses and all Americans to take effect at the beginning of next year. The President pleaded with the Republicans to do the right thing, all the while he sported an ink pen and vowed to use the pen to sign into law permanent tax cuts. He mentioned that there is no disagreement of not raising taxes of people making under $250,000 but with raising taxes on people above that rate, people who do not need tax cuts. The bill has stalled in Congress within the last couple of months mainly because of two reasons. First, the Republicans were hoping that President Obama would not get elected and that Mitt Romney would. Mitt Romney supported no tax hikes on anyone and supported less taxes for the rich. Second, since President Obama renewed the Bush tax cuts in 2010, he vowed to never do a temporary fix again, and this time he would see it through until a plan can be reached to make the tax cuts permanent. The decision now is clearly in the Republicans hands and they will have to act by January or accept the possibility that a tax hike across the board will come for all Americans, no matter what class you are in.
In the middle of the week on Wednesday, the President conducted meetings in the White House to gather more plans on how to reduce the national deficit. Again, his idea was to also strengthen the middle class and ask the upper class of Americans to do their fair share.

The President says that he has one mandate. It is to help middle class families and to help families that are working hard to move up to the middle class. He's not worried about the politics of it, and not interested in the special interests, just to work hard at it to see how it would be possible for people to get ahead. If his mandate works, then people will be back to work, people will able to purchase, and live the American dream.
On Thursday, the President traveled to Staten Island New York, to meet with local officials and to check on the on-going recovery efforts after Hurricane Sandy. He thanked first responders and comforted victims that are still directly effected from the devastation caused by the storm.

After all of this activity by the President, it was now time to begin his Asian trip. One of his goals was to expand the U.S. leadership in the Asian Pacific region. The President traveled to Bangkok Thailand, where talks were about security cooperation and to discover ways on how the American people and the Thai people can create more bonds to go forward.

The President was the first American President to visit the country of Burma. The President realizes the Burmese people and their goals to step towards Democracy. Recently, there were hundreds of political prisoners released from prison in Burma, cease fires reached with the ongoing civil wars within the country.

The President moved on to Cambodia, where he attended the East Asian summit which involved a variety of Asian nations to deal with challenges such as maritime security, energy cooperation, trade investments that would support jobs and opportunities for people of many nations, including the Asian-Pacific region. Lots of progress is expected there. Then a visit to Cambodia. He will be the first American President ever to visit Cambodia. America's interests will become more known there during this process, but people will also recognize what are the American values, including human rights which are so very important in this part of the world during this time in history.


  © Free Blogger Templates Columnus by 2008

Back to TOP